We have had good luck with letting udev do it's thing on CentOS7.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Anthony Alba ascanio.al...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Cephers,
What is your best practice for starting up OSDs?
I am trying to determine the most robust technique on CentOS 7 where I
have too much
A while ago, I managed to have this working but this was really tricky.
See my comment here:
https://github.com/ceph/ceph-ansible/issues/9#issuecomment-37127128
One use case I had was a system with 2 SSD for the OS and a couple of OSDs.
Both SSD were in RAID1 and the system was configured with
Hi all,
I've set up a ceph cluster using this playbook:
https://github.com/ceph/ceph-ansible
I've configured in my hosts list
[mdss]
hostname1
hostname2
I now need to remove this MDS from the cluster.
The only document I found is this:
Hi Loic,
this is the content of our ceph.conf
[global]
fsid = 719f14b2-7475-4b25-8c5f-3ffbcf594d13
mon_initial_members = ceph1, ceph2, ceph3
mon_host = 192.168.10.107,192.168.10.108,192.168.10.109
auth_cluster_required = cephx
auth_service_required = cephx
auth_client_required = cephx
On 24/02/2015 09:58, Stephan Seitz wrote:
Hi Loic,
this is the content of our ceph.conf
[global]
fsid = 719f14b2-7475-4b25-8c5f-3ffbcf594d13
mon_initial_members = ceph1, ceph2, ceph3
mon_host = 192.168.10.107,192.168.10.108,192.168.10.109
auth_cluster_required = cephx
- Mail original -
I have a Cluster of 3 hosts, running Debian wheezy and Backports Kernel
3.16.0-0.bpo.4-amd64.
For testing I did a
~# ceph osd out 20
from a clean state.
Ceph starts rebalancing, watching ceph -w one sees changing pgs stuck unclean
to get up and then go down to
Hello,
I also had to remove the MDSs on a Giant test cluster a few days ago,
and stumbled upon the same problems.
Le 24/02/2015 09:58, ceph-users a écrit :
Hi all,
I've set up a ceph cluster using this playbook:
https://github.com/ceph/ceph-ansible
I've configured in my hosts list
[mdss]
Sorry,
forgot to mention that I'm running Ceph 0.87 on Centos 7.
On 24/02/2015 10:20, Xavier Villaneau wrote:
Hello,
I also had to remove the MDSs on a Giant test cluster a few days ago,
and stumbled upon the same problems.
Le 24/02/2015 09:58, ceph-users a écrit :
Hi all,
I've set up a
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:17:22 +0100 Loic Dachary wrote:
On 24/02/2015 09:58, Stephan Seitz wrote:
Hi Loic,
this is the content of our ceph.conf
[global]
fsid = 719f14b2-7475-4b25-8c5f-3ffbcf594d13
mon_initial_members = ceph1, ceph2, ceph3
mon_host =
On 24/02/2015 12:00, Christian Balzer wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:17:22 +0100 Loic Dachary wrote:
On 24/02/2015 09:58, Stephan Seitz wrote:
Hi Loic,
this is the content of our ceph.conf
[global]
fsid = 719f14b2-7475-4b25-8c5f-3ffbcf594d13
mon_initial_members = ceph1, ceph2, ceph3
Hi all,
installing an OSD on an LVM volume seems not to be supported by the current
'ceph-deploy osd' or 'ceph-disk prepare' tools. Therefore I tried to do it
manually as suggested here:
http://eturnerx.blogspot.de/2014/08/how-i-added-my-lvm-volumes-as-osds-in.html
TL;DR, the process is:
-
I'll take a shot at answering this:
Operations are atomic in the sense that there are no partial failures.
Additionally, access to an object should appear to be serialized. So, two
in-flight operations A and B will be applied in either A,B or B,A order. If
ordering is important (e.g. the
Hello ceph-users,
I am currently making tests on a small cluster, and Cache Tiering is one
of those tests. The cluster runs Ceph 0.87 Giant on three Ubuntu 14.04
servers with the 3.16.0 kernel, for a total of 8 OSD and 1 MON.
Since there are no SSDs in those servers, I am testing Cache
On 24/02/2015 09:20, Xavier Villaneau wrote:
[root@z-srv-m-cph01 ceph]# ceph mds stat
e1: 0/0/0 up
1. question: why the MDS are not stopped?
This is just confusing formatting. 0/0/0 means 0 up, 0 in, max_mds=0.
This status indicates that you have no filesystem at all.
2. When I try to
2015-02-24 14:05 GMT+01:00 John Spray john.sp...@redhat.com:
I imagine that without proper partition labels you'll also not get the
benefit of e.g. the udev magic
that allows plugging OSDs in/out of different hosts. More generally
you'll just be in a rather non standard configuration that
Sorry,
forgot to mention that I'm running Ceph 0.87 on Centos 7.
On 24/02/2015 10:20, Xavier Villaneau wrote:
Hello,
I also had to remove the MDSs on a Giant test cluster a few days ago,
and stumbled upon the same problems.
Le 24/02/2015 09:58, ceph-users a écrit :
Hi all,
I've set up a
On 24/02/2015 12:49, Joerg Henne wrote:
This seems to work, however, the disks are not listed by 'ceph-disk list'.
Right. ceph-disk uses GPID partition labels to identify the disks.
Is there a recommended way of running an OSD on top of a LVM volume? What
are the pros and cons of the
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 6:21 AM, Xavier Villaneau
xavier.villan...@fr.clara.net wrote:
Hello ceph-users,
I am currently making tests on a small cluster, and Cache Tiering is one of
those tests. The cluster runs Ceph 0.87 Giant on three Ubuntu 14.04 servers
with the 3.16.0 kernel, for a total
Hello Noah,
In may case the ordering is importante and I seen that librados have an lock
implementation which I’ll use that on my implementation. Thanks for your help.
Regards.
Italo Santos
http://italosantos.com.br/
On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 12:52, Noah Watkins wrote:
I'll take
On 02/24/2015 09:06 PM, Loic Dachary wrote:
On 24/02/2015 12:00, Christian Balzer wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:17:22 +0100 Loic Dachary wrote:
On 24/02/2015 09:58, Stephan Seitz wrote:
Hi Loic,
this is the content of our ceph.conf
[global]
fsid = 719f14b2-7475-4b25-8c5f-3ffbcf594d13
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Chris Murray chrismurra...@gmail.com wrote:
... Trying to send again after reporting bounce backs to dreamhost ...
... Trying to send one more time after seeing mails come through the
list today ...
Hi all,
First off, I should point out that this is a 'small
On 02/24/2015 04:21 PM, Kevin Walker wrote:
Hi All
Just recently joined the list and have been reading/learning about ceph
for the past few months. Overall it looks to be well suited to our cloud
platform but I have stumbled across a few worrying items that hopefully
you guys can clarify the
On Wed, 25 Feb 2015 02:50:59 +0400 Kevin Walker wrote:
Hi Mark
Thanks for the info, 22k is not bad, but still massively below what a
pcie ssd can achieve. Care to expand on why the write IOPS are so low?
Aside from what Mark mentioned in his reply there's also latency to be
considered in
I have tried to install ceph using ceph-deploy but sgdisk seems to
have too many issues so I did a manual install. After mkfs.btrfs on
the disks and journals and mounted them I then tried to start the osds
which failed. The first error was:
#/etc/init.d/ceph start osd.0
/etc/init.d/ceph: osd.0 not
Hi All
Just recently joined the list and have been reading/learning about ceph for
the past few months. Overall it looks to be well suited to our cloud
platform but I have stumbled across a few worrying items that hopefully you
guys can clarify the status of.
Reading through various mailing list
Hi Kevin,
Writes are probably limited by a combination of locks, concurrent
O_DSYNC journal writes, fsyncs, etc. The tests I mentioned were with
both the OSD and the OSD journal on the same PCIe SSD. Others have
looked into this in more detail than I have so might be able to chime
in with
How can I remove the 2nd MDS:
# ceph mds dump
dumped mdsmap epoch 72
epoch 72
flags 0
created 2015-02-24 15:55:10.631958
modified2015-02-24 17:58:49.400841
tableserver 0
root0
session_timeout 60
session_autoclose 300
max_file_size 1099511627776
last_failure62
Hi Mark
Thanks for the info, 22k is not bad, but still massively below what a pcie ssd
can achieve. Care to expand on why the write IOPS are so low? Was this with a
separate RAM disk pcie device or SLC SSD for the journal?
That fragmentation percentage looks good. We are considering using just
I compare the applied commits between 0.80.7 and 0.80.8 , then I focus on
this：
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/711a7e6f81983ff2091caa0f232af914a04a041c?diff=unified#diff-9bcd2f7647a2bd574b6ebe6baf8e61b3
this commits seems take waitfor_read flushed out of the while cycle, maybe
this cause
Hello Kevin,
On Wed, 25 Feb 2015 07:55:34 +0400 Kevin Walker wrote:
Hi Christian
We are just looking at options at this stage.
Never a bad thing to do.
Using a hardware RAM disk for the journal is the same concept as the
SolidFire guys, who are also using XFS (at least they were last
Hi Christian
We are just looking at options at this stage.
Using a hardware RAM disk for the journal is the same concept as the SolidFire
guys, who are also using XFS (at least they were last time I crossed paths with
a customer using SolidFire) and from my experiences with ZFS, using a RAM
31 matches
Mail list logo
